WHOOP Workout

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds the authentication requirement ('Requires read:workout scope'), which is useful context beyond annotations. No contradictions found.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose and includes the required scope. Every word earns its place; there is zero waste or redundancy.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

While the description is terse, the presence of a detailed input schema, output schema, and rich annotations fills in the gaps. It covers purpose and auth, and the schema explains privacy_mode, response_format, and explicit_user_intent. For a single-resource getter with good structured metadata, this is sufficiently complete, though a note about raw mode escalation could make it more robust.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 75%, which is below the 80% threshold for a guaranteed baseline of 3. The description adds no parameter information itself, but the schema provides adequate descriptions for id, privacy_mode, and explicit_user_intent. The undocumented response_format is self-explanatory from its enum values (markdown/json), so the gap is minor.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states 'Get one WHOOP workout by UUID' – a specific verb, resource, and identifier. It distinguishes this tool from siblings like whoop_list_workouts (which lists) and other get_* tools for different resources.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies usage when a single workout needs to be fetched by UUID, but it does not explicitly mention when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'use whoop_list_workouts to find UUIDs' or 'use whoop_get_sleep for sleep data'). No exclusions or alternative tools are referenced.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.